Political correctness is cultural Marxism. It is designed to censor, inter alia, those thoughts and opinions which threaten, in particular, the socially Marxist, financially globalist, agenda.
Contrary to the membership’s wishes, UKIP’s leadership has turned UKIP into a politically correct organisation which is complicit with the imposed politically correct official view. There is no principled opposition to PC amongst its leadership although, as we have previously described, the leadership is out of touch with its members on this crucial issue. The task of Ukip’s leadership is to keep its increasingly outspoken members muzzled.
The latest ‘PC’ entertainment from Ukip arose last week. This time it centred on Councillor Silvester, who had defected to Ukip from the Tory Party. The Councillor attributed the recent spell of wet weather on divine retribution from the Almighty for the gay marriage policies of the Government. The story quickly spread to make national headlines.
In his initial response, the party spokesman performed a feat of mental gymnastics – eager to ensure he could keep his flock on board – and made the following statement:
‘If the media are expecting Ukip to either condemn or condone someone’s personal religious views they will get absolutely no response.’
Ah, what pugnacious bulldog courage from this unnamed representative! Someone standing up for Christian values, perhaps? Er, no. It was simply the start of yet another rambling ‘PC’ claim about ‘tolerance’.
‘Whether Jain or Sikh or Buddhist or Sufi or Zoroastrian or Jewish or Muslim or Baptist or Hindu or Catholic or Baha’i or Animist or any other mainstream or minor religion or movement, we are taught as a tolerant society to accept a diversity of ideologies [taught by who?]. ‘
‘Freedom of individual thought and expression is a central tenet of any open-minded and democratic country. It is quite evident that this is not the party’s belief but the councillor’s own and he is more than entitled to express independent thought despite whether or not other people may deem it standard or correct. That is what makes the United Kingdom such a wonderful, proud, diverse and free country.’
As readers will appreciate, the UK is no longer the wonderful, proud, free country the anonymous spokesman claims. Almost certainly, moreover, this spokesman does not live in Bethnal Green, Slough, Toxteth or other culturally enriched locations. Too bad, however, for those amongst the host population who cannot afford to move elsewhere!
To the extent this country still holds vestiges of freedom, this is only so because the nation has been built on Christian values and not, for example, upon any form of medieval barbarism, part of which passes for Ukip’s ‘diversity’. ‘Diversity’, of course, is appeasement and holds, in this context, that the culture of recent newcomers is at least equal to that of the indigenous host population.
A few days later, Ukip’s initial response was overturned as the ‘PC’ thought police behind the scenes administered a tweak or two. Councillor Silvester was suspended; he no longer had the right to state his opinions after all.
Whatever the pros and cons of the Councillor’s views, the Ukip leadership would clearly prefer that the Bible should be banned rather than that anyone should quote from biblical extracts, deemed today to be politically incorrect. If so, they will be suspended from the party. The same requirements appear not to exercise the leadership and the ‘PC’ brigade when the Koran is quoted.
Many readers will have noticed how, in the past year, Ukip’s ‘thought police’ have severely repressed those who have voiced politically incorrect opinions. The hapless victims of those who control Ukip have been ruthlessly purged, suspended or expelled.
As Ukip has grown, so too has its risk to the Westminster elite. The reality is that, rather as the communist parties of Eastern Europe metamorphosized into social democrat parties, so too has Ukip metamorphosed into a thoroughly reliable safety-valve party, acceptable to the Wesminster elite, the media and the numerous subtle influences who wield authority behind the scenes.
Nowhere more so is that the case than with immigration. Unless it is Farage who is opining, the media ruthlessly identifies and then pillories those in Ukip who discuss this topic. This serves an important purpose: Ukip is quickly knocked back into the parameters of what is acceptable and within the boundaries of political debate; dangerous opinions are extirpated.
The question every UKIP supporter needs to ask is this: what will it matter if, after freeing the nation from the EU, the country is deeply divided and ever more sensitive to the strident demands of minority groups, who will soon become the majority? Is this the legacy you want to leave to your children and grandchildren?